A.N. Varma, J. - (1.) THIS bunch of writ petitions is being disposed of by a common judgment as the controversies raised therein are identical. By means of these petitions the petitioners have assailed the legality and the constitutionality of a Government Order dated 18th of December, 1980, whereby the Government have purported to replace private retail distributors appointed for the sale of 'Government foodgrains and other Essential Articles' by Co -operative Societies. The petitioners were appointed as 'authorised distributors' for the sale of the aforesaid articles such as foodstuffs, sugar and kerosene etc. by the District Magistrates of their respective districts under an agreement executed by them in pursuance of the U.P. Foodgrains and other Essential Articles Distribution Order. 1977 (Distribution Order of 1977, for short) which itself was made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act with the object of ensuring a fair distribution of foodstuffs at fair prices through fair price shops. The petitioners were appointed as retail distributors under identical terms, except as regards duration of their agency, for the sale of Government Food grains and other Essential Articles by the District Magistrates. Under Clause 16 of the said agreement, the District Magistrate was specifically authorised to terminate the agreement at any time without assigning any reason.
(2.) ON 18.12.1980, the State Government decided to replace the aforesaid scheme of distribution of Government foodgrains and other essential articles through retail dealers by a new scheme whereunder fair price shops were to be run by Co -operative Societies. In pursuance of this decision, the impugned Government Order was issued on 18.12.1980 directing the District Magistrates of all the districts to terminate the existing agreements in favour of private retail distributors and for the period beginning from 1.1.1981 to appoint in their place Co -operative Societies for running the Government fair price shops. The petitioners have assailed the legality of the aforesaid Government Order dated 18.12.1980 on a variety of grounds most of which have been repelled by a Division Bench decision of this Court dated 29th of January, 1981 in writ petition No. 77 of 1981 connected with large number of other petitions. By this decision the Division Bench disposed of a large number of writ petitions in which identical contentions were raised. Some of the petitioners assailed the correctness of that decision before the Supreme Court, but their Special Leave petitions were dismissed. We now proceed to deal with the various contentions raised in these petitions.
(3.) THE first contention raised on behalf of the petitioners was that the petitioners held a statutory appointment having been appointed as authorised distributors under and in pursuance of Clause 2(b) of the Distribution Order of 1977. That being so, it was urged, the termination of the agreement executed by them could not legally affect their statutory appointment.;